Posted on 03/28/2003 10:31:30 PM PST by AntiGuv
CENTRAL IRAQ (Reuters) - U.S. commanders have ordered a pause of four to six days in a northward push toward Baghdad because of supply shortages and stiff Iraqi resistance, U.S. military officers said on Saturday.
They said the "operational pause," ordered on Friday, meant that advances would be put on hold while the military tried to sort out logistics problems caused by long supply lines from neighboring Kuwait.
Food rations have been cut for at least one frontline U.S. unit and fuel use has been limited.
The U.S.-led invasion force would continue to attack Iraqi forces to the north with heavy air strikes during the pause, softening them up ahead of any eventual attack on Baghdad, they said. The officers declined to be named.
"We have almost out-run our logistics lines," one officer said at a U.S. unit at the northernmost stretch of the advance in central Iraq. Some units have advanced to within 80 km (50 miles) of Baghdad, but are almost 500 km from Kuwait.
Some military units further to the rear were still pushing forward, however, Reuters correspondents traveling with the troops reported.
At Central Command in Qatar, a spokeswoman declined comment. "I don't have any information on that, because that would be considered current and future operations," she said.
On Friday, Britain's Army chief, Mike Jackson, dismissed suggestions that the campaign had become bogged down after a few days of quick advances from Kuwait since the invasion started on March 20. But he spoke of a need to pause.
"Armies cannot keep moving forever without stopping from time to time to regroup, to ensure their supplies are up," he told a London news conference. "It's a pause while people get sorted out for what comes next."
In one frontline U.S. infantry unit, soldiers have had their rations cut to one "meal ready to eat" packet a day from a normal three until supply trucks can get through.
GAS USE CUT
The U.S. military officers said that use of gas-guzzling armored vehicles had been restricted to save diesel. No resupply is expected for 24 hours.
Items like batteries for radios are also limited and soldiers and Marines have been told to conserve the ones they have. Fresh water is not a problem.
Stiffer-than-expected resistance from Saddam Fedayeen militias in towns along the advance lines has made running supply convoys a real problem, particularly from the southern city of Nassirya northwards.
Convoys this week through Nassiriya have been ambushed.
President Saddam Hussein's government has played down the apparently lightning advance by the U.S.-led forces, saying that most of the gains have been across tracts of desert while skirting major towns along the route.
Near the city of Najaf, the U.S. military is building a desert airstrip able to handle C-130 transport aircraft to help bypass the need to bring in new supplies by road. Najaf is 160 km (100 miles) south of Baghdad.
Means, take everything you read with a big grain/block of salt.
Secondly, if it is true, what is also true is that the main Republican guard units are trapped outside Baghdad. They can't advance, and they can't retreat. If they move, JSTARS, and other assets, see them and call in A-10s, BUFFS, F-16s, F-18s, F-14s, Tornados, Jaguars, Cobras, Apaches, and whatever else can be whistled up. Even when they don't move, they are being cut to ribbons from the air. Some arty too I would think. After a few days of that, the road into Baghdad will be a much clearer shot for the refreshed, resupplied and reenforced coalition units. Only the special Republican Guards, and a some of the paramilitaries, are left in Bahgdad. The "inner circle" those that aren't already dead, well them too come to think of it, can't communicate with the units outside Baghdad, except in the most rudimentry ways such as couriers on shanks mare or motorcyles, and even those have risks. The RG units north of the city and around Saddam's home turf can't reinforce the units in the south for two reasons, one they can't move with being shot all to shit, and two if they could the Kurds would be all over them like white on rice, supported by US airpower, mostly carrier based aviation from the two carriers in the eastern med.
I don't recall anyone saying the RG would surrender, but rather that the regular Iraqi Army units would, or at least wouldn't fight, and for the most part they haven't fought, but instead of surrendering, for the most part they've just faded away into the countryside.
You can tell this is from Reuters...
Not one quoted officer said it was "because of Iraqi resistance," as Reuters claims.
(Nonetheless, that's how everyone in the press is going to spin it...)
It is totally in conflict with this statement:
They said the "operational pause," ordered on Friday, meant that advances would be put on hold while the military tried to sort out logistics problems caused by long supply lines from neighboring Kuwait.
Umm, Reuters? get a clue... if the resistance was really taking a toll and holding us back, our supply lines would be very short, because we would not have gotten very far.
The quotes refer to outrunning the supply lines. That happens when you move FAST and FAR.
"We have almost out-run our logistics lines," one officer said at a U.S. unit at the northernmost stretch of the advance in central Iraq. Some units have advanced to within 80 km (50 miles) of Baghdad, but are almost 500 km from Kuwait.
Good thing for the Iraqi government that resistance was stiff or the US and UK forces would have blown right through Baghdad and would be halfway to PARIS.
Some military units further to the rear were still pushing forward, however, Reuters correspondents traveling with the troops reported.
Hmmm, doesn't seem like a theater-wide pause to me. Sounds more like a chance to rest up and fix things that need fixing.
On Friday, Britain's Army chief, Mike Jackson, dismissed suggestions that the campaign had become bogged down after a few days of quick advances from Kuwait since the invasion started on March 20. But he spoke of a need to pause.
*Ahem* : "Bogged down" doesn't seem to fit with "outrunning supply lines," and "within 50 miles of Baghdad."
I don't. I just hope and pray the "few days off" doesn't give the Iraqis time to improve their position and strength and wind up costing some of our boys their lives. I prefer Generals like Patton ("I don't want to hear any reports that we are holding our position. We are not holding anything. Let the Hun do that. We are advancing constantly. The only thing we are holding on to is the enemy. We are going to hold on to him by the nose and we are going to kick him in the a--. We are going to kick the hell out of him all the time and we are going to go through him like crap through a goose.") Or, in the Civil War, Stonewall Jackson: ("I sacrifice my men's legs to spare their lives").
What worries me most are these announced pauses. Why announce to the enemy that you are going to take a break. They ought to announce a 6 day pause and then attack with three divisions the NEXT day. I wish the President, on March 17, had given Saddam until April 15 to leave and then attacked that treacherous criminal the next day. Our battle plan should be: "Always mystify, mislead and surprise the enemy. When you strike and overcome him, never let up in the pursuit." The most brilliant military victories in history (Napoleon at Austerlitz, Jackson at Chancellorsville, MacArthur at Inchon, Scwartzkopf in the Gulf War, to name just a few) were all based upon deception, speed and SURPRISE. These military press conferences should be stopped and the imbedded reporters should be expelled from the units. They are at best a nuisance and at worst a real danger to the safety of our soldiers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.